[Retracted] Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Evaluation of the Efficacy of Manipulation and Cervical Traction in the Treatment of Radical Cervical Spondylosis

Table 1

Basic characteristics.

Study	Year	Cases (n = )		Gender (M/F)		Age, mean ± SD (years)		Type of manipulation	Endpoints
—	—	—		—		—		—	—
—	—	T1	T2	T1	T2	T1	T2	—	—
Deng [5]	2020	57	55	36/21	32/23	46.31  10.21	44.18  13.62	Rotation manipulation	AB
Zhang [6]	2015	36	36	24/12	26/10	43.42  13.31	46.52  14.52	Rotation manipulation	AB
Zhan [7]	2006	154	117	—	—	—	—	Pulling manipulation	AC
Qin [8]	2012	30	30	17/13	16/14	—	—	Rotation manipulation	AC
Liu [9]	2007	40	38	22/18	18/20	46.51  6.24	43.3  8.97	Rotation manipulation	AC
Fan [10]	2011	40	40	18/22	16/24	46.71  10.67	44.75  13.17	Rotation manipulation	AB
Jiang [11]	2012	41	38	—	—	51.82  10.37	48.93  10.11	Pulling manipulation	BC
Zhao [12]	2012	36	36	10/26	15/21	41.08  10.48	44.17  9.12	Rotation manipulation	AB
Li [13]	2012	30	30	14/16	12/18	44.82  10.89	45.26  9.64	Rotation manipulation	ABC
Zhang [14]	2008	31	19	—	—	54.23 ± 5.3	55.68 ± 4.63	Pulling manipulation	AB
Li [15]	2010	30	30	17/13	15/15	—	—	Pulling manipulation	AC

Note. T1: treatment group; T2: control group; A: short-term efficacy; B: mean differential VAS scores before and after treatment; C: mean differential symptom scores before and after treatment (neck pain, upper limb anesthesia, or viability).